UPDATED WITH VIDEO: Queensbury pub WON'T be demolished but Wembley green space WILL be built on

Save the Queensbury Campaign present their case against demolition of the pub

Mapesbury Residents' Association present their case against demolition of the pub

 The developer's planning advisor and the publican present their case

It was an evening of contrasts at Brent Planning Committee today. The latest round of the Willesden Green Queensbury pub saga ended in victory for the Save The Queensbury campaign when councillors rejected the Officers' recommendation and voted down the developer's latest plan B by 5 votes to 2.

No less than four local councillors from Willesden Green and Mapesbury spoke against the developer's proposal and there was a written submission by Cllr Tom Miller who could not attend. A powerful submission by Deputy Mayor, Cllr Lia Colacicco, was read out for her by Cllr Liz Dixon, with Cllr Colacicco following proceedings via the livestreaming. She argued that there had been no proper consultation by the developer, merely an exhibition with no discussion, it was an off-the-peg design that would not win any prizes and emphasised the Planning Inspector's comment that 'less than substantial harm' occasioned by a development, does not equate to a less than sub-substantial objection.

The most telling submissions were made by Ian Elliott of the Save The Queensbury campaign and a spokesperson for the Mapesbury Residents Association who clearly had hundreds of people behind them. They had done their research and mastered their brief which was not always the case with planning officers who were left leafing through their numerous documents in some desperation.

Perhaps the most pathetic moments were when the developer's planning agent tried to claim that there WAS a kitchen in the plans and officers tried to indicate a tiny space on the projected plan, unmarked, which they said was a kitchen space; and when officers tried to justify that a black 'tin roof' on the new building would somehow both be in keeping with, and enhance, the area.

The combination of strong community campaigning winning the support of councillors led to victory.

This morning the Save the Queensbury Campaign said:

We’ve asked Brent Council leader Muhammed Butt and Chief Executive Carolyn Downs to review officer conduct running up to & including the meeting last night. Misleading content in reports, biased extracts, incorrect verbal info given to councillors brought local government & planning into disrepute.

In contrast the arguably more far-reaching plans to build on green space in central Wembley went through unanimously with no representation from residents and ward councillors. There was a passionate intervention from the public gallery after the committee had unanimously agreed the proposal with little discussion. The resident lived opposite the proposed development and felt that she had not been properly informed or consulted.

Another London Road resident lamented that her neighbours were not interested enough to get themselves organised and that the area felt neglected by ward councillors and their MP Barry Gardiner. A new development at the end of London Road would add to congestion and crowding and she declared vehemently that after what had happened she wanted to move out of Wembley.

The architect for the development admitted that few people had turned up at the London Road consultation and that this was a continuing problem with people only getting involved when it is too late.

Officers did not mention that many of the trees that will be cut down to make way for the housing development have Tree Preservation Orders on them but it appears that when the development is on Council owned land little can be done to stop the felling.  Planning officers accepted the claim that planting saplings on the estate will make up for the loss of mature trees.

The loss of green space which is both a SINC (Site of Importance for Nature Conservation) and a wildlife corridor is a worrying precedent when we have a council desperate to build much needed housing but with a blind spot regarding the environment and heritage. Officers accepted that a few bird and bat boxes was sufficient mitigation for the loss.

The Save The Queensbury Campaign have now published their own account of the meeting HERE

Staff to strike over Strathcona school closure

From Brent National Education Union

Brent Council Cabinet voted on Monday to move to a Formal Consultation regarding the proposed closure of the Roe Green Strathcona site school. This was despite overwhelming opposition from staff, parents and the community to this during the informal consultation where a massive 463 written responses were received with only 3 in favour and 460 against (99.4%). A petition with 396 signatures opposing the closure was also delivered to the Council but was ignored too.

The Council also received an unprecedented letter from Brent North MP Barry Gardiner where he stated that there were so many flaws in the informal consultation that...

 If council officers had been actively trying to prepare a case for the closure of the school, these are precisely the measures they might have taken.

Brent National Education Union has highlighted the risks to staff jobs if Strathcona is closed – and they have conducted a ballot of their members for action which was overwhelmingly supported.  They are seeking an urgent meeting with Gail Tolley, Strategic Education Director, to try to resolve these concerns. Failing this NEU members will be on strike on 25^th June.

Lesley Gouldbourne, Brent NEU Secretary, said :

It is extraordinary and shameful that Brent is refusing to listen to parents, governors and staff at Strathcona - a school in the top 3% of the country. At the same time as it is preparing to close Strathcona because it says there are not enough pupils, it has given planning permission for ARK Sommerville - a primary Free School in Wembley- to open! You do wonder what is really behind this proposal.

Brent Councillor Jumbo Chan said:

 It is disappointing Brent Council is proposing to close a local school, thus ignoring both staff and parents. The fact that there may also be a new academy being opened compounds this disappointment. Brent Council should reconsider its decision, and seek a new alternative.

Pride of Brent Youth Awards nomination deadline extended to June 23rd

From Brent Council

The deadline for nominations for the Pride of Brent Youth Awards has been extended to Sunday 23 June 2019.

Nominate a young person today for the Pride of Brent Youth Awards!!! Use the link below to download a nomination form.

Pride of Brent Youth Awards 2019

Nominations are now open for the 2019 Pride of Brent Youth Awards. The Pride of Brent Youth Awards aim to celebrate the achievements of our young people across Brent. We want to recognise young people who try hard to make a difference in their community and those who often put others before themselves. We would like you to nominate those young people who make Brent a better place to live and work in 2019.

You know who they are: they’re the young people who have excelled often overcoming their own personal difficulties to do so. They are the young people who lead by example and who make time to help others in their community.

These young people come from all walks of life, from different backgrounds, ages and cultures. The positive impact they make can be seen throughout life in Brent.

Nominate a young person today and help us celebrate the young people who really do put the Pride in Brent.

Nominations must be received at the Civic Centre either in electronic or hard copy by Sunday 23 June 2019.

There will be a Pride of Brent Youth Awards ceremony taking place on Saturday 20 July 2019 here in Brent Civic Centre.

Access the nomination forms and guidance using the link below or go to the front page of the Brent Council website.

https://www.brent.gov.uk/your-community/pride-of-brent-youth-awards-2019/

If you have any questions, please email us - PrideofBrentCommunityAwards@brent.gov.uk

Planning Committee to decide whether to build on designated open space in Wembley Central

At the end of the long London Road, off Wembley High Road, there is a little known open space adjacent to the playing fields behind Ark Elvin Academy and Elsley Primary School. The open space is designated as such in Brent's Core Strategy Policy CP18 but planning officers argue in their report going to Planning Committee on Wednesday 19th June that it should be built on, partly because part of it has been covered in tarmac:

Officers do not consider that the site has the character or usability of conventional open space despite its designation as such. Officers therefore consider that the space could appropriately be developed for residential uses without materially detracting from the value of the playing fields open space designation.

The site is close to a Grade 1 Site In Nature Conservation (SINC) which is close to the brook to the south and is also designated as a woldlife corridor.

When I visited the site much of it was fenced off but these photographs show the nature of the site.

It is planned to remove 29 of the 43 trees on the site, including all those that have a tree preservation order.  I am not sure if it is proposed to fell the very handsome mature oak on the site that can be seen in the satellite view. Officers argue that there will be a net gain as 85 new trees will be planted as pat of the development.

Overall they argue that the loss of the open space is outweighed by the gain in terms of housing. The plan for the site can be seen below. Click bottom right corner for full page view.

As well as new housing there will be a replacement community centre slightly smaller than the present one but no new youth centre:

NAIL (New Accommodation for Independent Living) Residential Units (25 total)

     17x studio flats 
 8 x 1 bedroom flats 


Residential Units providing temporary accommodation (53 total) 


32x 1 bedroom flats (which are adaptable to a 2 bedroom layout) 


21x 2 bedroom flats (which are adaptable to a 3 bedroom layout)

General Purpose Residential Units for Affordable Rent (92 total) 


10x 1 bedroom flats 


61x 2 bedroom flats 


13x 3 bedroom flats 


8x 3 bedroom houses

 


Community Centre (293sqm indoor space + 168sqm outdoor space) 


There have been four letters of objection to the development and a 57 signature petition of objection from nearby households. Elsley Primart School supported the development on the basis of local housing need.

Kingsbury’s Post-War Prefab Homes – free talk on Tuesday 25th June

Local historian (and Wembley Matters correspondent) Philip Grant will be giving a free talk, at 11am on Tuesday 25^th June, as part of Kingsbury Library’s regular monthly “Coffee Morning” events. His subject this time is the “prefab” bungalows that were built just after the Second World War, to provide urgently needed temporary homes for families.

Nothing is left of them today (the last ones locally were gone by the early 1970’s), but they had been a feature of Roe Green Park, Silver Jubilee Park and a corner of what is now Fryent Country Park (an estate called Pilgrims Way!).

Much of the talk will include memories and photographs from people who lived in the Kingsbury prefabs. It is the social history of everyday local people, although some went on to be more widely known (including a future Leader of Brent Council, and a world famous musician).

The event is free, with refreshments (although Brent Libraries would like everyone who comes to borrow at least one library book as part of their visit). If you are not doing anything else that morning, and think that the talk might be interesting, why not come along?

'Socially Useful Work' - the Lucas Plan and its current relevance - film & discussion Monday 17th June

Informal consultation reveals strong support for Strathcona School but formal closure consultation to go ahead

A report going to the next Brent Cabinet meeting reveals overwhelming support for retention of the Strathcona school which the Council has earmarked for closure but recommends that Cabinet go ahead with formal consultation on closure:

RecommendationL Cabinet approves a period of formal consultation, through publication of a statutory notice, on proposals to:·change the age range of Roe Green Infant School from 3-11 to 3-7·reduce the school’s Published Admission Number (PAN) from 150 to 120 for September 2020·implement a phased closure of the provision on the Roe Green Infant School Strathcona site.

The Council's handling of population projection data and its competence at planning school places was questioned by respondents with many asking why the authority had created large 3-5 form entry schools. There are calls for the scrapping of the controversial new Ark primary school due to be built on the car park of York House on a busy road in Wembley Park.

The Council was criticised for not promoting the school enough and questioned as to why it was choosing to close high quality provision.

Concern was expressed oveer the impact of closure on individual pupils and their families.

Brent Council responded that the closure was due to falling demand and not about the quality of education.

Full Consultation Report (Click lower right square to enlarge)

Brent planners recommend Queensbury pub demolition scheme despite vociferous local opposition

This pub will be demolished unless Brent Planning Committee reject planning officers' recommendation

The fears of the Queensbury Pub campaigners that Brent Council will give in to the developer of the Willesden Green site and agree to the demolition of the well-loved pub appear to have been realised.

Two almost identical schemes have been put forward and the planners reject Scheme A and recommend acceptance of Scheme B.

The developer is currently at Appeal over the Council’s rejection of the earlier scheme, Campaigners claim that their FOI request revealed that the developer agreed with Brent Council that the appeal will be dropped if the Planning Committee grant the Scheme B application.  The Planning Committee papers do not note that agreement.

Officers note (claim?) that ‘less than substantial harm has been identified in the loss of the building’ housing the public house and that the identified harm is ‘outweighed by the significant public benefits’ of the scheme.

The scheme does not meet the Council’s 50% affordable housing target but that is glossed over by a vague reference to a ‘post-implementation’ review.

There is no guarantee that the replacement pub space would have a kitchen despite the fact that the survival of public houses these days depend on their offering meals and the food offer is a strength of the current pub.

The development would yield a sum of  £890,000 in Council Infrastructure Levy (CIL).

Officers’ Conclusions (FULL REPORT HERE)

The proposed development is considered to have addressed the issues identified with the scheme currently at Appeal. Whilst less than substantial harm has been identified in the loss of a building which is viewed as making a positive contribution to the character of the Mapesbury Conservation Area, the identified harm is outweighed by the significant public benefits which arise from the scheme. These include: the removal of visible negative public realm features such as signage and poorly designed extensions; direct street-level access; an increase in housing provision and affordable housing provision, the provision of a formal community space/ function room. 

Whilst design will always be a subjective matter, the removal of the bulky and intrusive front elevation results in a building which appears more coherent in the streetscene and in keeping. Internally, the standard of accommodation of individual units is improved with more regular shaped rooms proposed and units meeting with the Technical Standards; and outlook and amenity space provision is also considered acceptable. No issues are again raised in relation to neighbour impact. 

The overall design of the public house is now considered to be suitably distinctive from the residential elements. The applicant has reviewed other design options such as retaining the existing building, however as discussed above, a viable scheme would result in a scheme which would completely dominate the existing building, have unacceptable impacts on neighbouring occupiers or unacceptably alter the existing building. 

The affordable housing offer of 35 % does not meet the 50 % target set out in current Council’s adopted policy and there remains some disagreement in relation to the some of the variables and the associated potential surplus generated by the scheme. However, it is considered that this can be resolved through a post implementation review which would use actual sales values and build costs as opposed to hypothetical values. Any money received will contribute towards much needed affordable housing elsewhere in the Borough. It is also noted that the current offer by the applicant of 35% affordable by habitable room would comply with the draft London Plan and with emerging local policy. 

The Planning Committee will decide on the application on June 19^th, 6pm at Brent Civic Centre. If you wish to speak on the application email:
joe.kwateng@brent.gov.uk

The Save The Queensbury Campaign  told Wembley Matters:

Once again we rely on members of the Planning Committee to take an objective view of the three schemes before them. Members are asked to back a scheme they’ve effectively Refused and now subject to Appeal. Members are not told that granting the scheme will take the Appeal off the table; that deal has been done.

None of the schemes meet Affordable housing targets and worryingly, there are no plans for the community groups using the pub six mornings a week. Much is promised in future reviews and legal paperwork but that will be done behind closed doors and without community involvement.

Neither the developer or officers have offered any evidence that the community welcomes this decision.

Members should not fear going against their officers. They did this before and Brent went on to win the Appeal and we are confident that the same can happen again.